Talk:United Front for Autonomous Nations
Oh for the name of Quartermaster Corporal Jesus H. Christ! Seriously? I barely even so much as MENTION an M4 or AK! Is this for real? I can't even have an insurrectionist group. Listen and sing along if you know: So now I have at least a reason to have weapons that are older, but does that satisfy you admins. Hmm, how about NO. I don't understand this. So you wanted me to get rid of the US, and not have 21st century weapons without a reason. Well i've done those things, but you're not satisfied. Good day to you.--B1blancer2 17:57, May 13, 2012 (UTC) ::You are still having a group that uses 21st century weapons to fight 26th century weapons, and the former group is somehow more successful than the five-centuries-more-advanced technology. This is physically and realistically impossible. ::In addition, the UNSC is subordinate to the UEG, and ONI already spies on the general populace thanks to Section 2, which controls the mass media and keeps tabs on potential threats. Beyond this, MACs wouldn't be used because they'd be targeting the heavily populated Earth - firing on a planet with a MAC would cause the crust of the planet to break in only a few shots, very quickly rendering the planet uninhabitable through a downward spiral. ::Lastly, SPARTANs would only be used against terrorists if they were large-scale enough that all other special forces had proved inefficient, a point which an uprising on Earth would not reach, since it's the capital of the UEG and UNSC. However, even if Spartans were deployed, they would not kill surrendering prisoners-of-war indiscriminately, as this violates international war laws, and would result in the court-martial of the Spartans, who are also required to uphold such laws. --Am I a Lion, or a Lamb? Or a Boy? Saint o The Lost Books 18:24, May 13, 2012 (UTC) OK, I think I have the article in somewhat acceptable condition. Could you read it, and if it is suitable, remove the WW2Halo template. Thank you.--B1blancer2 01:49, May 14, 2012 (UTC) A few issues *The ship shown in this image is, or at least very closely resembles an ''Allen M. Sumner''-class destroyer, making that specific ship - the [[Wikipedia:USS James C. Owens (DD-776)|USS James C. Owens (DD-776)]] (if that hull code is anything to go by) - well over six hundred years old, and absurdly obsolete. *The UFAN arms itself with weapons caches scattered across the globe. Can you provide a credible reason why United Nations Space Command forces failed to secure or locate these armaments in three-hundred ninety-five years? Or failing that, why insurrections that have been active for the past seventy-one years were unable to find these caches? Finally, if these caches are truly so incredibly well-hidden, how does the UFAN find them? *The UFAN is supposed to be able to go up against the Longswords of the UNSC with aircraft that are between 590 and 528 years old. To try to make a modern comparison, picture this aircraft - less than a hundred years old as of this posting - taking on this aircraft. *The UFAN has a preference for ambushes, specifically using mines and air support. Ignoring for a moment the previous point about the quality of the UFAN's air force, where exactly do these ambushes take place? Who or what exactly are they ambushing? And how do they justify this with their apparent cause of "ending government spying"? Where do they get their intelligence on what I presume must be UNSCDF troop movements? Also, given that your article is still in violation of the WW2Halo rule, please don't remove the template. Auguststorm1945 (Talk) 04:32, May 14, 2012 (UTC) Response Hmm, well the Fokker could wait for the F-22 to get near enough to fire a missile, then slow down, let the Raptor fly by, and open fire with its machine guns. Nah, just kidding. Anyway, the UNSC or URF don't find the caches because mostly they are covered in snow or sand. The UFAN finds them when they are forging a path through the areas, and they come across a peculiar anomaly. They search it, and inside they find locations of other caches, which allow them to arm themselves. They get UNSC troop movements by taking control of an old, i'd say about 30-40 year old spy satellite, and checking areas of interest. Ambushes occur on well traversed roads, before a UNSC convoy comes through a trail or road, UFAN sappers screw it up, slowing down the convoy, and leaving them open to attack.--B1blancer2 04:45, May 14, 2012 (UTC) :If you would like to have the WW2Halo template removed, please address all the points made above instead of only one. While there are problems that haven't been solved, you are by no means entitled to complain to an administrator for tagging your article (actually, you aren't entitled at all since the reasoning has been all laid out for you already). If this really does piss you off, that's not Grizzlei's problem, or anyone's except yours. This tagging is not a personal issue, and the sooner you accept that, the better things will be for you. Perhaps your frustration stems from the fact that your "21st century military vs 26th century military" idea simply is not plausible. Having us throw that cold hard fact doesn't change anything at all. Again, something you need to accept as truth. 1:38, May 14, 2012 (EST) Some additional points to bring up. Firstly, that the images you have on the article are in violation of the WW2Halo template: http://halofanon.wikia.com/wiki/File:8-2873_1.jpg The above depicts: two M60A3 "Patton" tanks, introduced in 1978. One AAVP-7A1 amphibious assault vehicle, the original incarnation of which was introduced in 1972. U.S. infantry in M81 Woodland Battle Dress Uniforms (BDUs), which were used from 1981-2005. M16A2 rifles (introduced in 1982), M249 SAWs (introduced in 1984), and Carl-Gustav recoilless rifles (1986, M2). http://halofanon.wikia.com/wiki/File:Soldier-with-ak47.jpg The above depicts a Russian soldier in 3-colour Flora camouflage, in service from 1998 to 2008. In addition, an AK-47 rifle, in service from 1947 to 1959. Secondly, and more pressingly, the "plot" elements. To begin, you should be aware that the U.R.F. constitutes the largest, and the strongest, decidedly anti-UEG militant group. It is itself constituted primarily by UNSC deserters and former CMA personnel, and is subject to pseudo-military standards of training, discipline, organisation, and doctrine. Whereas insurrectionists fight through terror and guerrilla tactics, the URF fights conventional battles. That said, to not ally oneself with the URF, as an anti-UEG rebel, simply demonstrates a lack of common sense, given that the URF easily possesses the most in the way of resources and fighting capabilities. In addition, I may have misread, but if I didn't, you should be aware that no rebel group, no matter how well funded or organised, would be able to have nuclear weapon production facilities. Not only would the materials be rare and under lock and key by UNSC military forces, but the entire construction process is complicated and expensive. Further, the UNSC has effectively been "spying" on its citizenry since the beginning of the rebel movements and insurrection well before the Human-Covenant War: hence their general unpopularity outside of the inner colonies. The Human-Covenant War, naturally however, would have swung public opinion decidedly in favour of the UEG and the UNSC. Moreover, you should realise that the UEG is a democratic republic, with representative bodies for fair representation of colonial and Earth-based national interests. Countries were not absorbed by a power hungry organisation: they still exist, and operate under the UEG out of a sense of alliance and unity. The UEG is more or less simply a government that governs nations, composed of delegates and politicians put into office by those nations. There is no suggestion or likelihood that the UEG would abandon all of its values to pursue a totalitarian and oppressive regime a few years following the end of the Human-Covenant War, which was in itself an intensely unifying experience for humanity. Regarding technology, WW2Halo template aside, you really should be aware of the technological disadvantage: compare, for example, the Pattern 1853 Enfield muzzle-loading musket to the FN SCAR-H rifle, and that constitutes a 156 year difference. Likewise, compare the British Mark V tank of World War I to the modern Russian T-90 MBT, which constitutes a time difference of less than 100 years. Auguststorm covered the aircraft analogy. Not only would "modern" weaponry and equipment be cheaper and easier to procure than centuries-old technology, it would be far more effective, even if your rebels would still be disadvantaged compared to the UNSC. You should see from those examples that using incredibly outdated technology would only lead to one possible result: defeat. Take this advice from a serviceman and veteran of Iraq. In regard to your "ambush" strategy, the most glaring flaw is that the UNSC Air Force, Naval Air Force, or (possibly) Army Air Force would possess absolute air supremacy: with the most advanced fighter aircraft in Human history and the best-trained combat pilots. That said, no sooner would your rebel aircraft be detected than would they be shot down. Some other things to keep in mind: the fact that UNSC soldiers, marines, and other combat personnel, especially post-Human Covenant War, would be very heavily armoured and incredibly well trained (as many would be veterans). Also that the UNSC would be well-adjusted to guerrilla tactics from its many conflicts regarding rebels and insurrectionists. You would also take care to note that SPARTANs would only be used in extreme cases, being that there would be only a handful alive post-war, and that conventional SOF would be sufficient to eliminate groups of poorly trained rebel forces. In addition, SPARTANs would not torture: they are the essential paragons of military discipline and doctrine, and would not risk violating the "laws of war". Also, mind, that a single MAC shot is capable of rendering a planet devoid of life: the forces behind the slug would be sufficient to propel it through the planetary crust, causing an extinction event. I apologise if I come off as rude, but understand that your idea still has many unrealistic aspects to it.